PEOPLE on low incomes who are accused of crimes may have to pay to clear their name under legal aid reforms designed to save the equivalent of just 65 metres worth of Edinburgh tram track, according to experts.

Legal, disability and human rights experts were unanimous in their condemnation of a proposal to make people pay a financial contribution towards their legal aid at Holyrood today.

Innocent people on "medieval levels of income" could forego their right to a lawyer, plead guilty to save money and end up in prison because they do not understand the consequences, MSPs heard.

Meanwhile, guilty people could frustrate the legal system by refusing to pay and leave a string of unpaid legal firms.

Unpaid lawyers may then have to make a "commercial decision" to pay the client's contribution out of their own pocket to keep them on the books in case they go on "to commit rape or murder" and earn more money for the firm, it was suggested.

The Scottish Government has published draft legislation designed to save £3.9 million from the legal aid budget.

Mark Harrower, vice president of the Edinburgh Bar Association (EBA), said: "I believe, the EBA believe and the GBA (Glasgow Bar Association) believe this will cause huge problems for the running of summary criminal business.

"I walked past a massive hole in the ground to come here today (the Edinburgh tram project) which is costing hundreds of millions of pounds.

"We're talking about one of the finest legal systems in the world. I think we need to get our priorities right."

Edinburgh's 13km tram project is currently estimated to cost around £776 million, or £59,700 a metre.

Mr Harrower said an average client contribution will be £134 for a not-guilty plea and £145.60 for a guilty plea, creating "a financial disincentive" to plead not guilty.

James Wolffe QC, representing the Faculty of Advocates, said the disparity could lead to "perverse incentives" to plead guilty or forego legal advice altogether.

Ian Moir, legal aid vice convener of the Law Society of Scotland, suggested that the legislation could see a rise in the number of people representing themselves.

"People on a minimum wage, if the figures as proposed were brought in, would have a contribution in excess of £800 to £850," he said.

"It's likely to lead to people saying: 'I can't afford to make the contribution that I'm being asked to pay, so I'm just going to plead guilty without a lawyer'.

Colin Lancaster, director of policy at the Scottish Legal Aid Board, said solicitors "will make a commercial judgment as to how they decide to respond to a client who doesn't pay".

He added: "The solicitor will look at a client, look at their history, and work out whether it's worth severing ties with this client for what might be a small contribution for a client who has delivered repeat business to the firm and is likely to deliver repeat business in future, and may well deliver solemn business (a jury trial for a serious offence) to the firm."

A recent report by public spending watchdog Audit Scotland found that delays in the court system were estimated to have cost £87 million in 2010.

Mr Moir also suggested it may be difficult to get people to pay their contribution retrospectively, particularly if the case goes against them.

"It's simply unrealistic to think for one minute that you can write to someone who has just been sentenced to 12 months imprisonment and say: can you empty your Post Office account to pay a contribution of £400 towards what he will view as you 'getting him the jail" he said.